Selig should grow some balls... Topic

holer
Posts: 479 (0)
Hall of Famer
88 6 59 52
Prospect
Quote: Originally posted by sergei91 on 6/07/2010didn't people in this thread mention they didn't reverse a blown call in a w.s. game?surely if they didn't change that then they won't/shouldn't change this now
There's actually a second clearly blown call in a World Series game that would have amounted to something just as historic, if not more historic, than the perfect game. In the 1992 World Series, Kelly Gruber tagged Dieon Sanders on the heel of his foot in what should have been only the second triple play in World Series history. The first happening in 1920 by the Cleveland Indians. That obviously blown call was not reversed in a situation very similar to this one. It did not affect the outcome of the game, but would have made rare baseball history.
I agree with the league's decision on both counts to not reverse the decision for the same reason some others in here have. It sets a terrible precedence akin to the opening of Pandora's box. This is a team game and the blown call did not affect who won the game. Pure and simple.
6/7/2010 4:11 PM
bosoxbill
Posts: 2 (0)
Hall of Famer
85 12 21
Prospect
Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 6/07/2010It's not the objective of the game.   So, if that's true, and you don't seem to be disputing it, are you an advocate of reversing the umpire's judgement so we can have a Happy Day?Because, if that's it, that's pretty stupid.

I am an advocate of reversing any and all calls which should have ended games, but did not. And only when there's clear video evidence that the call was blown.

I am an advocate for this when it would provide a "happy day" AND for when it would provide someone with a "frowny day."

Not because the "happy days" and "frowny days" are important, but because being right is important, and these situations are a chance to be right WITHOUT COST.

Unlike with, say, a call which ends a game but should not have. Where things can not be remedied without a time machine or other stupid unrealistic crap.

Seriously: it's been a while, Mike. It needs to be "happy day" and "frowny day" or you can't follow the discussion? I mean, you were always stupid, but I don't remember having to use second-grader language to communicate with you.
6/7/2010 4:53 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Too long. If you didn't say "No, you're wrong. The objective of the game isn't to win, the objective is personal achievement. And personal achievement was taken away by a bad call", I'm not interested.

Did you say that?
6/7/2010 5:18 PM
bosoxbill
Posts: 2 (0)
Hall of Famer
85 12 21
Prospect
Same old mike.

Just got your *** handed to you, so you'll pretend not to read it.

My post probably gave you a frowny day, huh?
6/7/2010 5:26 PM
toddcommish
Posts: 5109 (0)
Hall of Famer
523 10 1 14 16 90
Prospect
Quick question for Bosux:

Are you saying that the Jim Joyce call was "clearly blown"?

Because there's a reasonable argument that Galarraga was bobbling the ball (snow cone initially, pulled in on second snatch)... So while the call was clearly missed (Joyce didn't see the bobble and called "out" based on the who he thought hit the bag first), it wasn't clearly WRONG.
6/7/2010 5:41 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 6/07/2010
Too long. If you didn't say "No, you're wrong. The objective of the game isn't to win, the objective is personal achievement. And personal achievement was taken away by a bad call", I'm not interested.

Did you say that?



Answer the question.
6/7/2010 6:53 PM
bosoxbill
Posts: 2 (0)
Hall of Famer
85 12 21
Prospect
Quote: Originally posted by toddcommish on 6/07/2010Quick question for Bosux:Are you saying that the Jim Joyce call was "clearly blown"?Because there's a reasonable argument that Galarraga was bobbling the ball (snow cone initially, pulled in on second snatch)...  So while the call was clearly missed (Joyce didn't see the bobble and called "out" based on the who he thought hit the bag first), it wasn't clearly WRONG.

Jim Joyce thinks so. Or certainly seems to.

And he's certainly a guy whose opinion on the matter I trust (relative to, say, yours) given...

A) He's a professional umpire.
B) If anything, ego would make him go the other way on this one - "the only one who was perfect out there was ME."
6/7/2010 7:40 PM
bosoxbill
Posts: 2 (0)
Hall of Famer
85 12 21
Prospect
This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.
6/7/2010 7:40 PM
toddcommish
Posts: 5109 (0)
Hall of Famer
523 10 1 14 16 90
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By bosoxbill on 6/07/2010
Quote: Originally posted by toddcommish on 6/07/2010
Quick question for Bosux:

Are you saying that the Jim Joyce call was "clearly blown"?

Because there's a reasonable argument that Galarraga was bobbling the ball (snow cone initially, pulled in on second snatch)... So while the call was clearly missed (Joyce didn't see the bobble and called "out" based on the who he thought hit the bag first), it wasn't clearly WRONG.

Jim Joyce thinks so. Or certainly seems to.

And he's certainly a guy whose opinion on the matter I trust (relative to, say, yours) given...

A) He's a professional umpire.
B) If anything, ego would make him go the other way on this one - "the only one who was perfect out there was ME.
Well, I'm inclined to believe that Jim Joyce is a decent, intelligent human being (despite his career choice), and that he realized that mentioning the clear bobble would make him look even worse (since he clearly didn't do the bobbling hand motion).

I'm just asking, if Jim Joyce did the bobbling motion when he called the runner "safe" (the correct call), would you be more or less inclined to be raising a ruckus over instant replay?
6/7/2010 7:55 PM
bosoxbill
Posts: 2 (0)
Hall of Famer
85 12 21
Prospect
Had this error been less glaring, and the effects been less disastrous, I think there's every chance it would not have occurred to me that there is a perfect, no slippery-slope rule just waiting to be implemented.

Put another way: "All calls which should have ended games, but did not, are reversible by the commissioner's office only when there's clear video evidence that the call was wrong"

is the sort of thing that you come up with when you're spending time on a topic.

And, had the circumstances been other, I think it's possible I wouldn't have spent as much time.

I think it's worth pointing out that, in the given hypothetical situation: blown call, should have ended game, next batter makes history (say, fifth homer in the game) - I'm still saying the call should be overturned and the homer taken away.

Because that's the implication of the nice, clean, bright-line, no-slippery-slope rule: Stuff that shouldn't have happened, but for a clearly blown call, didn't happen. It doesn't matter that we'd be taking a "happy face" away from someone. (This is going to be of particular comfort to submorons who like to make sure decisions aren't happy-face-based.)
6/7/2010 8:02 PM
bosoxbill
Posts: 2 (0)
Hall of Famer
85 12 21
Prospect
Also, I think you're insulting Joyce a bit.

He strikes me as a guy who, presented with a very hard situation, manned up and told the absolute truth and took complete responsibility.

To imagine that he suppressed something (like seeing a bobble) after the fact, rather than to tell the truth, seems to be to be doing him a great disservice.
6/7/2010 8:04 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Disastrous? Hold on just a sec, dramaqueenbill.

Explain the "disastrous" effects of the missed call.

6/7/2010 8:11 PM
bosoxbill
Posts: 2 (0)
Hall of Famer
85 12 21
Prospect
It made an ump cry on national tv. I had to watch it. That's disaster enough for me.

If you don't like the word, substitute another, guy-who-it-turns-out-can-read-but-only-when-he-finds-something-to-nit-pick.
6/7/2010 8:19 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
You "had" to watch it? Weird. I've found this crazy little contraption that allows you to change channels or even turn it off without getting up. Of course, I'm assuming that you're incapable of standing and walking away.
6/7/2010 8:24 PM
bosoxbill
Posts: 2 (0)
Hall of Famer
85 12 21
Prospect
Your mom was giving me a gummer. It seemed rude to stir around a bunch, even though it wasn't that good.

So I watched it.
6/7/2010 8:27 PM
◂ Prev 1...10|11|12|13|14...30 Next ▸
Selig should grow some balls... Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.